Gregory, C. O.

English

Duke Law Scholarship Repository

BOOK REVIEWSTHE FEDERALISTS: A STUDY IN ADMINISTRATInVE HISToRY. By Leonard D. White. NewYork: The Macmillan Co., 1948. Pp. xii, 538. $6.oo.Leonard D. White was only fifty-seven years old when he published this volume;but he may properly be called the dean of public administration in the United States.He has been a member of the Chicago and the United States Civil Service Commissions,president of the American Political Science Association and of the American Society forPublic Administration, and editor-in-chief of the Public Administration Review. Hisnumerous writings on the subject include the standard college commentary, which is nowin its revised edition.It is not surprising, therefore, that widespread interest was aroused when it becameknown that Professor White had decided to write a history of public administration inthe United States. The plentiful literature of public administration which the twentiethcentury had poured forth included no such history. Those political scientists who, de-spite the pressure of specialization, desired to preserve the integrity of Politics in thesense of Aristotle had begun to wonder whether the tail had not forgotten the very exist-ence of the dog; and in the last decade or so that tail had been public administration.It was decidedly in order for historical research to expose the superficiality of the here-and-now by supplying public administration with a time dimension which would giveit perspective and contact with the general stream of American political development;and because of his standing, his experience, his knowledge, and his breadth of vision,Leonard D. White was the man to undertake the task.The result has been even happier than could have been anticipated. The Federalistsis the first installment of what may already be called the definitive history of Americanpublic administration. It should be received with enthusiasm not only by devotees ofthat discipline but also by students of general history, of government, of public law, andof constitutional development. Its forty chapters furnish a full account and a thoughtfulappraisal of the twelve years of administration of the national government by the Fed-eralists under Presidents Washington and John Adams. The book is well documented,and is written almost exclusively from primary sources. At the same time the style islucid, and even the most technical topics are developed in a manner that is interestingas well as informative.The chapter headings have a wide range, from "George Washington as an Administra-tor" to "The Statutory Law of Officers"; from "The Hamilton-Adams Conflict" to"Administrative Powers and Sanctions"; from "Federalist and Republican Theories ofExecutive Power" to "Administrative Discretion"; from "Government in the Wilder-ness" to "The Problem of Smuggling." It is evident from several of these titles that thevolume makes an important contribution to the history of American administrative law.Of general historical interest is the treatment of such subjects as the relation betweenAdams and his cabinet, the feud between Jefferson and Hamilton, which is analyzedfor the first time from the standpoint of its administrative aspects, the state of the admin-istrative art, and the administrative theory and achievements of the Federalists.The reader of this volume will be as captivated by incidental points as he is instructedLAw AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMSby the total picture and the broader conclusions. He will discover that administrativebill drafting began, at least in contemplation, in the first year of government under theConstitution;' that both "legislative planning" and "government enterprise" were repre-sented in the purchase of two islands off the coast of Georgia "in order to secure a growthof live oaks for ship timbers" for the Navy;2 that Hamilton wrote of "efficiency andeconomy";3 that he got Congress to centralize all purchasing in the Treasury; 4 thatCongress provided, for enforcement of tonnage duties and other requirements, the purelyadministrative sanction of retention of the ship's register and papers;5 and that TobiasLear, "the great secretary of the period," had a "passion for anonymity." a  These arebut samples to whet the appetite.For Washington as an administrator Professor White has justified respect. "Hiscompetent performance in administration grew out of two separate aspects of his expe-rience-his life as a plantation manager and his life as a military commander." 7  "Todeliberate maturely, but to execute promptly" was his motto. "In reaching decisionsWashington required all available facts."0  "Washington was more clear in principleabout the necessity of avoiding detail than he was successful in practice."'10 "He under-stood good administration to be characterized by integrity, system, energy, reliance onfacts, relative freedom from detail, and due responsibility to Congress."'"Hamilton, however, "was the greatest administrative genius of his generation inAmerica, and one of the great administrators of all time."' 2 "To Hamilton is due theone outstanding administrative achievement of the Federalist period, an achievementwhich stood far above the normal capacity of a scattered, rural, eighteenth-century popu-lation unaccustomed to large affairs-the organization and management of the fiscalservice of the federal government."' 3 "He reserved initiative for himself, and for him-self the ultimate official discretion.' 4"The Federalists," concludes Professor White, "developed a body of doctrine whichwas dear-cut, well considered, consistent in its several parts, and which as a wholeformed an intelligent system of theory and practice of public administration."'1  Thisbody of doctrine is summarized with admirable clarity and succinctness; and elevencontributions which the Federalists made to American government are enumerated.Of course, however, the author points out:The Federalist concept of public administration was firmly based on a politicaltheory which, although antimonarchical, was not warmly democratic. Federalistsaccepted the philosophy of government for the people, but not government bythe people. In their view, government could only be well conducted if it was inthe hands of the superior part of mankind-superior in education, in economicstanding, and in native ability.' 6There is no analysis, however, of the paradox that it is the Federalists rather thanthe Republicans who have furnished to a more democratic, twentieth-century Americauseful principles of publi c administration. Perhaps such an analysis will come at theend of the second volume of this history.That volume will be awaited by many with keen anticipation. The reviewer hopesthat in it Professor White will continue the method by which in the first volume he has'P. 57. 'P. 16r. 'P. 36x.'Pp. 361-362. 5 P. 446. pP. 495.496.'7 P. oI. PpP. 114-115. P'. 05.P. io6. 'P. 104. ' P. 126.23 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 1 P. 507." p. 508.Book REVIEWS 705presented a thorough and authoritative treatment of a short period, and hence will pro-duce a study of Republican administration from x8oi to 1828 rather than a less significantsurvey of public administration throughout the nineteenth century.JAmEs HAR'.School of Political Science,University of Virginia.INsIGHTs INTO LABOR IssUEs. Edited by Richard A. Lester and Joseph Shister. NewYork: The Macmillan Co., 1948. Pp. X, 368. $4.00.This is a volume of thirteen essays by leading authorities in the field of labor-manage-ment relations and labor economics. Reading them has excited me somewhat and hastaught me a good deal I hadn't known; but it has also made me feel depressed, sinceis has revealed to me the huge gaps in my own knowledge. Furthermore, I now realizethat to do my job in the law school, I must keep abreast of at least the outstandingcontributions in an entirely new field of literature-the periodic output of the industrial-relations centers. But this book offers one consolation-if it may be taken as a precedent-since its appearance suggests that in the future the cream from the annual product ofsuch writing will be competently skimmed off and published between the covers of onefairly small volume. It goes without saying that I don't see how lawyers and studentsinterested in labor-relations law can afford not to read this book. Regardless of whatthey may think of the various contributors' conclusions, they will acquire a good dealof valuable information and, what is more important, fresh points of view which it isimpossible to get otherwise.It is something of a task to review this book, because to do so fairly requires a baker'sdozen of separate reviews. I have tried, therefore, briefly to suggest what these essayshave to say, with little or no comment, my object being merely to indicate what the bookis about and whether or not it is worth reading.The first of these essays---"Toward a Theory of Labor-Management Relations"--expresses anxiety over the possibility that the many new industrial-relations institutesmay dissipate their resources by not being sure in advance where they are heading, andwhy. Briefly, it recommends the adoption of hypotheses to guide research in labor-management relations in order to make such research uniform and effective as well assusceptible of being done on a basis of cooperation among scholars in different parts ofthe country. It then sets forth a framework within which research and special casestudies in this field can profitably be conducted; and this over-all framework, in turn,consists of formal subdivisions. The breakdown concerns types of industrial organiza-tions and incidental economic factors such as the nature of products markets and labormarkets, as well as of capital requirements and cost conditions. It emphasizes the im-portance of studying motivations of the parties to labor-management relationships, withparticular reference to union political and economic philosophies and varying employerreactions to these notions. Naturally, it touches on the human aspects of the relationships,briefly indicating the applicability of more or less scientific procedure in studying suchmatters; and in general it focuses attention on developing patterns of collective bargain-ing. While the authors of this essay create an air of conviction about their main point-that research in this field must be orderly and along preconceived lines-this point itself,and the positive suggestions set forth, are not sufficiently specific to be very enlightening.Although I am in complete agreement with them, I am still not sure just what we areall agreed upon.Essay number two is a first-rate job of describing and evaluating multi-employer bar-

Insights Into Labor Issues edited by Richard A. Lester and Joseph Shister

bepress Legal Repository

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2383&amp;context=lcp

Insights Into Labor Issues edited by Richard A. Lester and Joseph Shister

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Duke Law Scholarship Repository

bepress Legal Repository